Skip to main content

About your Search

English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13
today of the catastrophic medicare repeal back in 1989. might history be repeating itself? this as democratic leaders like nancy pelosi insist all is well. president obama himself about to rally his most ardent supporters and ask them to stand by the very troubled health care law. >>> and the dow crosses the 16,000 mark for the first time, but then retreats. and the debate continues over whether this rally is a bubble. those stories and much more coming up on "the kudlow report," beginning right now. welcome to "the kudlow report." we're live at p.m. on the east coast, 4:00 p.m. pacific. let's get right to the breaking news that president obama may be turning obama care back to the insurance companies. i think where it belongs. cnbc's eamon javers joins us with the details. good evening, eamon. >> reporter: good evening, larry. the white house was on the defensive again today, arguing with reporters over these predictions made by the white house that the website would be up and running by the end of this month, and dividing and conquering exactly how many people are going
on to two programs either medicare or forcing them into the private insurance system. it will increase the cost. the other great mistruth, obama said everybody would get a $2,000 reduction in premium on average. the premiums are going way, way up because there's no cost containment at all except the medicare people. >> of course there is. because you don't like obama care or because there's problems in the roll out you can't assert people are losing their health insurance because of obama care. people lose their health insurance all the time. you got have some kind of connection to reality here. it doesn't allow you to just go ahead and say every wild thing you want to say. >> james, mckinsey which is a nonpolitical, they say that probably one-third of the 150 million people covered by insurance today possibly and probably one-third, 50 million will lose their current employer coverage within the next two years. that's going to be momentus. it's an earthquake. >> be careful because i don't know, and i don't know the study and i don't know people losing employer coverage, losing their j
nature. medicare pays $90 of that. but for the same thing, the exchange plans are offering around $60 to $70. more upsetting to some doctors, they feel these rate reductions aren't being clearly spelled out, not being transparent. separately, the obama administration is pushing back the enrollment dates for the exchanges by eight more days. this means the new deadline to sign up is now december 23rd. anyone picking up a plan by then will be covered as of january 1. next year's deadline will be november 15th, 2014, instead of october 15th. there are some cynics that say the pushes in enrollment pushes it right back to after the mid-term elections. instead, larry, of just before it. back over to you. >> gee, you think it has something to do with the elections? how about that? dominic chu, cynic supreme. i want to start on these dramatically slashed doctors' fees. every day the true cost of obama care becomes clearer. here the doctors get squeezed performing the same services for bargain-basement prices. so much for keeping your doctor if you like him. i don't know. i fear the death of t
house. and then i went on -- at that point i was 70 years old and medicare picked it up. i still carry medicare as the backup. >> that gets me into the debate about obama care. will the affordable care act work. has it changed our system? >> almost step-by-step tops i am going to grind. >> if they can't set up the website, what else is flawed in the system. medical devices played an important part. the inflatable defibrillator, those kinds of devices have been through innovation, entrepreneurs, guys willing to take a chance and make investments and that all happened in the last 40 years. now obama wants to tax them. there's a device tax built into the legislation. terrible idea. the worst possible thing we could do. >> yesterday bill clinton really took a whack at obama and said obama should abide by his commitments. let them continue their insurance and doctor if they want to even if we have to change the law. what's your feeling? does clinton have that right? every once in a while he unleashes and he did that yesterday. is he right? >> i don't always agree with bill clinton. i think
that we've identified as eligible and medicare and medicaid in california, about 59,000 probably update that have an opportunity and there's a disparity. you're correct. you're not wrong about some of the challenges as it relates to the quality of care and the reimbursement ca reimbursement associated with medicare and medical. >> various reports from all around the country, california being such a big state. bob, let me ask you a big one. small group insurance, all right, they are going to get there -- we talked about this last night but they are going to get their renewal slips. they are going to have the very large, as i understand it, 30 to 40% premium increases. what if they say no, bob? what if they decide they'd rather pay the penalty and go off on their own? >> you're absolutely right, larry. what is going on is the next shoe in obama care is dropping. just this week, the january 2014 small group renewals went out. i'm talking about brokers around the court and they are receiving them and the rate increases are pretty stiff. the people in the small group, under 50 memployee mark
debated enough. >> let's give some people statistics. 25% of medicare spending goes to the last year of life. end of life care is absolutely a disproportionate amount of medicare spending relative to the number of people, and i think people on both sides of the aisle agree there's some kind of problem there. the question is how do you fix it? you talked about rationing, mark. what i find frustrating about this discussion is the following. we all ration. rationing will happen. i have a lot more wants than the means i have to fulfill them, right? every single day we make choices in our life. the question isn't will there be rationing. the question is who is going to do the rationing? am i putting that correctly in your mind, mark? >> 100%. look, i believe the united states shouldn't be the only industrialized democracy on the planet that doesn't have universal health care. the aspirations of the law are great, but if you're going to have huge cuts, and this is going to require huge cuts, again, this isn't my sort of making something up. when i was covering the passage of the law, white
according to the congressional budget office, the spending on medicare and medicaid by 2020 would be 10% less if this cost growth slowdown persists. now everybody is wait to go see whether in fact the economy grows morrow bustly. it will wipe out some of these. the white house relies on them for changes in reimbursement rates, hospital penalties to make sure they're providing care more efficiently. all sorts of reforms that could potentially slow health care costs over the long run. that's something the administration wants to point to. we'll see how long it lasts. >> many thanks. john howard, we appreciate it. back with our panel. i want to get your quick take on what he just reported. there's a difference of opinion about the definitions. glen kesler said national health care expenditures have been growing just under 4% for the same time period. it may be a definitional issue. the question before the house, both of these numbers are slowdown numbers. the question before the house and i'll start with you, congressman, can obama care take credit for the 1.5% number or the slow down numb
're on medicare, anytime they hear health care is not working, they fear for themselves. >> that's the thing, steve murphy, back to you. you've xwrgot a dozen senate democrats, and i don't mean the more conservative ones like joe manchin. i think about centsenator jean she sha sheen. she wants to stepped a lot of these deadlines which in my humble opinion makes a lot of sense. i'm not for obama care. but if i were, i would want to open up and extend, it's not just the individual mandate, you'll have to go through the employer based mandates. who knows, there may be -- estimates run up to 50 million or 100 million. why wouldn't the white house say to a jeanne shaheen and the 6 or 8 or 10 others, all right, well will give everybody time to get this done properly and feix the white house. why is the white house so inflexible when the polls are killing them? >> the answer is very simple. the white house understands what i just said. in has to work and they have to get it fixed. there isn't any point in delaying most parts of it for a lengthy period because that's not going to do anything to help
to say let's stop enrollment. i remember doing the bush administration when medicare part d was rolled out. they delayed it. the reason was because it's bumpy. rolling this stuff out is difficult. it's hard. it's complex. but for the administration to continue to stonewall and be oh, what are you talking about? the sky is not falling and look at you, you're an idiot. but looking at them, i'm not saying they're idiots. >> bureaucratic stonewalling. >> very much. so. >> that's how i describe sebelius. i've been up there. and sometimes they do have to dance. i get that. i've testified. i want to come back to your point on the president and the credibility. i really believe that the single biggest mistake he made was going back on his promise to grandfather the existing plans. in other words, his own staff, and this is the part, his own staff is conjuring up regulations over the past three years which is basically putting the president in an untenable position, because the regs were so strong that they had to give up the grandfathering. do you agree with me on that? was he sabotaged by his
the medicare age, which is something that conservatives and joe lieberman talked about doing up until the point wrerp about to do it in which case the bottom fell out of it. that's why this approach, with an individual mandate, was originally the conservative alternati alternative. the problem here and the good-faith problem for some, not all, but some republicans in congress is, again, to mr. kristol's point, they don't have the alternative. and every time we get near something they once proposed, they don't like it anymore. >> i think i can sum up ari's answer to your question. too bad. we're all in this together whether you want it or not. too bad. >> with all due respect -- and it is ari, like safari. you want to hit the pronunciation correct. >> don't they say it's too bad? he's got to take it because that's what you've decided. >> no, respectfully, i spoke with specificity about how the insurance market works and why there isn't one plan you're being forced into. and by the way, for people at the lower income options, if they want to pay $95 in the penalty, they can opt out completely. th
) meee-ow, business pro. meee-ow. go national. go like a pro. [ticking] >> last year, medicare paid $55 billion just for doctors and hospital bills during the last two months of patients' lives. it's a perfect example of the costs that threatened to bankrupt us and how hard it's going to be to rein them in. >> genes--as a result of them, you've inherited some of your family's finest qualities, along with predispositions to deadly diseases. you probably know that science has made giant leaps in detecting and treating some of those illnesses, but what you probably don't know is that at the same time, biotech companies haven
take? is this going to go under before it gets out? >> well, they put a letter through the medicare and the medicaid services hinting they were going to juice up the bailout provision that was already enacted in the law to help the insurers if they suffered from adverse selection twha.'s . what's going on here? the president said keep your people on the old plans in 2014. that means the people going into the exchanges will be likely to get a lot more claims. the result will be a lot higher payouts and premiums and the insurers will lose a lot of money. the result will be that the government will end up having to cover those costs with the risk corridor provision they wrote into the law. >> the risk corridor is what really interests me. do they have to go to congress to get those extra funds, jim? >> no. that's already been built into the health care law. but they are hinting that the regulations that are implementing it will be juiced up to give even more money to the insurers. look for that in the coming days. >> i think all hell will break loose if that goes through. nobody wants
the architects expect to fail. in the budget request, 116 million people would be getting medicare/medicaid next year. 44 billion people don't have health insurance. 43% of the americans who have health insurance next year are going to get it direct from uncle sam. i think where we're heading is -- >> so you're saying government -- no question medicaid is a single payor system. but i don't think that's where most of the democrats want to go yet. and i want to ask you, you've worked in the white house. you've got different plans. some of the democratic senators want to delay the penalties, they want to delay the enrollment deadline. some of them like senator landrieu, she wants to make it possible for everybody to get their insurance that they had and keep it for whatever some period of time. in your opinion, will any of these legislative bills every get voted on much less pass? >> it's tricky. one thing i agree with that was said before, the key question is when the president just said we'll fix these problems, what did he mean by that. that is really the question. because i thought that he did
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13